p.17 #2 · Pre-order Now! Sony FE 16-35/2.8 GM and FE 12-24/4 G
It can be hard if you don't have a decent knowledge of basic statistical methodology, and that is why no one took up your test. Different images, different days, different light conditions, processing, different everything. Maybe very different lenses, you don't say, zoom/prime, who knows.
Here is an A-B test, done correctly, using a good number of FM photographers:
'So the final result for Set 1 is *88% correct identifications*. Pair B was apparently the most easy to classify (92% correct) while pair E (83% correct) was the most difficult.'
They overwhelmingly got it right, in other words. I remember showing my partner some of the pairs, and I asked her a different question, and bear in mind she has observed my Zeiss images for years: I asked 'which she preferred' - she picked the Zeiss shot for each of them.
It's not worthwhile to explain why Zeiss lenses do it for very experienced users because not everyone cares, or cares to know, or they get disturbed. But no one has to prove anything. If interested, you can go here and read what this photo mag editor of many years has to say:
p.17 #4 · Pre-order Now! Sony FE 16-35/2.8 GM and FE 12-24/4 G
philip_pj wrote:
It can be hard if you don't have a decent knowledge of basic statistical methodology, and that is why no one took up your test. Different images, different days, different light conditions, processing, different everything. Maybe very different lenses, you don't say, zoom/prime, who knows.
Yes, you are right. All different images/days/light/processing etc. Perhaps I'm just swimming against the tide here but I felt those reasons are precisely why it would be legitimately interesting to see if anyone can correctly pick the Zeiss-made images. My point in my original post was not that there is no visible difference when SOOC or processed identically, but that by the time image processing is done (or at least my image processing workflow) I'd question whether any difference would remain noticeable or relevant given you can tailor your approach to the output of the lens you are using.
The link you provided was very interesting; thanks. I had a look at the pairs and while I could see differences (sometimes very subtle) between each shot in the pairs, I'll be honest and say with the possible exception of one pair, I ultimately didn't feel any overwhelming preference for any given image in each pair. What differences did exist, for example a slightly warmer or cooler rendering, or more or less microcontrast, these factors could be adjusted for in PP as well. Bokeh of course isn't something you can do a lot with in PP, but this can vary dramatically even within the same brand anyway - that is to say, even Zeiss has lenses with 'good' and 'bad' bokeh.
Of note, that comparison test was done using web-size JPGs of approximately the same size as the files I posted earlier.
Look at the end of the day I am not claiming no one can see the 'Zeiss look' in an image or that I am right and anyone else is wrong. Absolutely not. I cannot see it but it does not mean no one can; however in the real world we are not comparing large prints of an identical scene taken with two different lenses side-by-side; we look at and enjoy a print on it's own merits. My landscapes undergo a fairly rigorous PP workflow and I do believe any signature look that may have been embedded in the RAW is probably long gone by the time I'm done. But if anyone has better eyesight than me and can genuinely see, and appreciate the 'Zeiss look' when not compared directly against another lens more power to them. Cheers
p.17 #5 · Pre-order Now! Sony FE 16-35/2.8 GM and FE 12-24/4 G
Tried out both these lenses today at Fixation in London and have decide to pre-order the 16-35 GM. It really is hardly any bigger or heavier than the F4 version.
p.17 #7 · Pre-order Now! Sony FE 16-35/2.8 GM and FE 12-24/4 G
Viramati wrote:
I tried shooting it wide open at 35mm in FF and crop mode on my A7rII today and detail is impressive and it renders the OOF areas very nicely
I'm interested in this lens for landscapes but if it's like other GM lenses, bokeh balls will be clean/rounded and OOF rendering smooth. It could make a great 28/2.8 and 35/2.8 environment portrait lens.
p.17 #8 · Pre-order Now! Sony FE 16-35/2.8 GM and FE 12-24/4 G
Fred Miranda wrote:
I'm interested in this lens for landscapes but if it's like other GM lenses, bokeh balls will be clean/rounded and OOF rendering smooth. It could make a great 28/2.8 and 35/2.8 environment portrait lens.
Unfortunately even though they let me take it outside to take a few shots the surrounding environment didn't really let me get any decent shots to see it's edge performance though from what I did get I think it betters the f4 version in the corners. I think it has the potential to be an excellent landscape lens
Looks pretty good on the edges. This shot is quite informative: at infinity the edges hold up quite well although if you look in the near corners they are very soft, this was 12mm at f8. Without knowing the focus/field curvature behaviour of the lens it may be one that requires a bit of focus blending. https://keyassets.timeincuk.net/inspirewp/live/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2018/05/DSC00174-acr-1.jpg Obviously it is a depth of field limitation but it seems like the focus point was perhaps 'past' infinity for them to be that soft. I dunno.
p.17 #10 · Pre-order Now! Sony FE 16-35/2.8 GM and FE 12-24/4 G
Bespoked wrote:
I'm super interested to get my hands on it for testing with my usual subjects, I know the slight loss of detail in the very extreme edges won't matter. I think I'll order three copies as usual and pick the best if there's inconsistency.
I was about to clumsily hang a huge Sigma from a footless adaptor MC-11), for more money, like a douche, thanks Sony!
Where do you order from in Australia that will allow you to return the two other copies? Teds allow returns but for store credit only; if there's somewhere with a more generous return policy I'd love to know.
p.17 #11 · Pre-order Now! Sony FE 16-35/2.8 GM and FE 12-24/4 G
Me too. Most Aust retailers I know would laugh if I suggested doing that for me. They figure they are doing you a favour selling you the product in the first place.
p.17 #12 · Pre-order Now! Sony FE 16-35/2.8 GM and FE 12-24/4 G
Bespoked wrote:
I'm absolutely sure it matters how much you order, we just bought out 6th A7RII from the same retailer I always go to. They not only allowed me to shoot the A9 before purchase outside the store, he also is the only retailer that allowed me to borrow a Loxia and compare it to other lenses (outside the store, I took it to my office) and return it (wasn't a huge fan), Zeiss Australia said they couldn't/wouldn't loan and I'd 'have to buy it and sell it on ebay if I didn't like it'.
It's probably not their policy, I really appreciate it and attempt to purchase everything from them, which isn't a problem because the pricing is reasonable and service is top notch, they don't sell everything though so we go to one other retailer for those.
I'm not sure I should promote this because as I said, it's probably not their policy to do this kind of thing, but I'm going to highly recommend Camera Lane for Sony, Leica and Zeiss and some of the guys at Digi Direct, both in Melbourne city. One or two of the Digi Direct guys are awesome, one or two of them are useless, Camera Lane is always top notch.
We spend about $20K per year on equipment, it's constantly sold when out of warranty and we run three systems, Sony (A9, A7II, A7RII), Nikon (D8xx) and Panasonic for stills, you really do have to build a relationship with your store, possibly even with a particular sales person....Show more →
Thanks. I had a look at Camera Lane; they do indeed have a 7 day return policy although I suppose it remains to be seen how generous they would be in the case of multiple returns of bad copies if that relationship did not already exist with them. I'd probably consider buying "low risk" items from them; high risk ones would be very expensive if you needed to return it multiple times (I am in Sydney.)
DD is interesting.. they used to have a fairly good return policy but scrapped it some time ago. Now it's pretty much the stock standard ACL policy, in other words, the same as anyone else. I've had mixed experiences with them - when I returned an obviously and noticeably poor sample of a lens they were extremely reluctant to help and tried to get me to accept an opened, demo model in exchange (but would provide no discount.) They had no other unopened stock. I refused this and after a bit more back-and-forth they did finally consent to a refund but I wouldn't say it was done with a smile. I don't blame the staff member - she was as helpful as could be, but seemed handcuffed by store policy and kept having to consult the manager.
I found the guys at Mainline in Crow's Nest to be extraordinarily helpful; they let me take a sample of the CV15 and CV12 outside onto the street to shoot with unaccompanied and with no form of security. Both were great samples (5th try lucky in the case of the 15, 1st try for the 12) and I bought both; unfortunately they don't stock any of the mainstream brands so are not a store I shop with often but if they carried every brand I'd probably never go anywhere else.
p.17 #14 · Pre-order Now! Sony FE 16-35/2.8 GM and FE 12-24/4 G
I would wait for more reviews. Copy variation may come into play with the 16-35 GM as well, but didn't this guy use a copy from a press event? I'd think that those are properly adjusted.
Granted, a good copy of the 16-35 4 is very good (esp. on the wide end), but you would think that the higher price tag and faster aperture guarantee better performance. At the very least the new GM should match the performance of the a-mount 16-35 2.8's second iteration.
p.17 #15 · Pre-order Now! Sony FE 16-35/2.8 GM and FE 12-24/4 G
He said his tripod broke so we should assume hand held. Assuming this is true then it would be hard to make valid comparisons. I want one of these lenses for ultimate edge to edge sharpness for hiking and travel landscape work. Whichever provides gets my money.
Mirror wrote:
What do you guys think about this comparison of the 16-35GM and the 16-35ZA. I simply expected more from the new GM... Bad copy, bad testing?
p.17 #16 · Pre-order Now! Sony FE 16-35/2.8 GM and FE 12-24/4 G
Mirror wrote:
What do you guys think about this comparison of the 16-35GM and the 16-35ZA. I simply expected more from the new GM... Bad copy, bad testing?
Copy variation plays a big role imo. Whenever a see a review site testing a single copy, it remains unclear if that's how a lens really performs. To believe my own results, I need to test a least at couple centered copies. I've seen 16-35/4 ZA lenses going from very soft to sharp corners. Unfortunately there's more copy variation with zooms (like 24-70 GM, 16-35/4 ZA, etc.), so unless quality control changed dramatically, the new 16-35 GM with its complicated design and more elements will likely follow this trend.
It's also hard to say from the released MTFs... The new 16-35 GM's MTF only shows 10 and 30 line pairs/mm (see image below) while the f/4 ZA shows 10, 20 and 40 lp/mm. We may have to wait for Roger (lensrentals.com) to test dozen copies of the new GM before we speculate how it performs at infinity. I pre-ordered one and will compare to my 16-35/4 ZA (which is a perfect copy) but can't guarantee my GM will be good. I hope I get lucky so I can post accurate samples comparing the two lenses.
From what I've seen, it will not be easy to beat the 16-35/4 ZA for landscapes (f/5.6 and smaller). It's well designed with lots of special elements (5 asphericals, 3 UD). Even the long end is great stopped down. I expect the GM to do very well but I would not count on it being much better than the f/4 version. We'll see.
p.17 #18 · Pre-order Now! Sony FE 16-35/2.8 GM and FE 12-24/4 G
GMPhotography wrote:
I have it pre-ordered as well . I hope I get lucky again as I did with the 24-70. Now I have the A9 I would like to test the 24-70 again for AF speed
I've tested a few of your lenses and you are indeed a very lucky Guy!
p.17 #20 · Pre-order Now! Sony FE 16-35/2.8 GM and FE 12-24/4 G
Since I have lethal GAS, I am undeniably curious about this lens. The Sony 16-35 F4 is my most used lens and I have a pretty good copy, though. Unless this lens proves to be WAY better than the F4, "faster" is not reason enough for me to buy it. I use F4 stopped down most of the time anyway, and have the Batis 18 and Loxia 21 for fast WA. So I can't see buying this one unless it proves to be stellar by a majority of reviewers.
